Sign up with

By signing up, you agree to the Code of Conduct, which applies to all online and in-person spaces managed by the Public Lab community and non-profit. You also agree to our Privacy Policy.

As an open source community, we believe in open licensing of content so that other members of the community can leverage your work legally -- with attribution, of course. By joining the Public Lab site, you agree to release the content you post here under a Creative Commons Attribution Sharealike license, and the hardware designs you post under the CERN Open Hardware License 1.1 (full text). This has the added benefit that others must share their improvements in turn with you.

In the particulate matter and "Frac Sand" (sandstone that is crushed and used as proppant in hydraulic fracturing) project (see https://publiclab.org/wiki/frac-sand), we are interested in low cost, accessible ways to learn more about the particulate matter in the air we breathe. We're especially interested in whether or not there are easy, accessible ways to see if there are respirable airborne particles (less than 5 micrometers in diameter), and if those particles are crushed silica or are particles formed from condensates (see more about that here: https://publiclab.org/wiki/silica-monitoring#Exposure+to+silica+in+occupational+and+non-occupational+settings). In this specific question, I'm wondering if any DIY microscopes have high enough resolution to accurately measure the size of particles collected on filters or other surfaces, and identify if they are small enough to be respirable. If it is not possible to accurately measure the size of individual particles, is it possible to estimate the general size of particles? Mathew Lippincott started this work and has done some particle sizing (such as this note: https://publiclab.org/notes/mathew/09-03-2015/optical-imaging-of-passive-particle-monitors). Here I'm curious about other DIY microscopes and improved resolution of this set up.